Imagine a fantasy setting where every man has a sword

>That TD
>Muh dick

There is nothing inherently wrong about guns. I think guns are useful and my country would be safer with more of them.
Don't ban guns, just refuse the "you can't prove it wasn't self-defense" argument.
>Judge: There are 14 different types of material evidence connecting you to this murder, 8 witnesses, and you were found eating the victim's head. What do you have to say for yourself?
>Killer: It was self-defense. You can't prove the victim WASN'T going to kill me at some unspecified time in the future. For all you know, I could've just preemptively eliminated a potential threat to my life 20 years before it was going to happen. You can't prove a negative.
>Judge: Oh, well why didn't you say so! You can go free.

Guns are fine, but people constantly overlook the maintenance and training involved.

The same could be said of swords.

The same could be said about permeating disrupto-casters

Seriously though, why the fuck are permeating disrupto-casters legal?

But permeating disrupto-casters are self-maintaining...

Seriously though, why the fuck are cars legal?!? They kill more people per year than any other human object!

Why the fuck are humans legal? They kill more people per year than any other animal!

Why do you even need a permeating disrupto-caster? Just buy a magno-thermal blaster or call the police like a normal person. How many more children need to die before you people come to your senses?

>Imagine a pornographic setting where every man has a penis

The same could be said of all religions.

Don't worry chum, our AI overlords have come to the very same conclusion.

...

Only men? Would not play.

I hope you are using the word 'man' in its most universal sense.

>abercrombie

Disgusting.

Fine, more true to your lives
>Imagine a pornographic setting where every man has a penis in his ass and mouth at the same time.

Yeah, I'm more of a Fitch man myself.

Guns are easy to operate and are entirely common sense, we have millions of guns in private hands and less than 5% have military training and less than 40% have any training what so ever. If I place a gun in the hand of a functioning gun, unloaded but with a full magazine, every person with a play station will be able to discharge it effectively and safely as we've been doing it for several hundred years.

They will be scared of the authority and trust they have been given by holding a weapon. That is it.

And the bang, people are scared of loud noises. Take a friend to the range and watch them flinch and jump at each round, it's funny. But by the end of the session, provided they dont have ovaries, they will be over it.

Most people are scared of authority, trust and responsibilty and nothing represents that more than a firearm.

>If I place a gun in the hand of a functioning gun
I suspect a gun wrote this post.

>Everyone wants to ban guns
>But nobody actually wants to ban handguns
>But nobody actually kills anyone with rifles
>But rifles are scary
>And used to kill a bunch of people a handful of times
>But they account for fewer deaths per year than cows
>But even if they did ban all guns, people would still kill each other with knives and baseball bats
I don't get it, what's the point? What makes gun violence worse than knife violence? What makes gun deaths worse than cow deaths or car deaths? Why don't focus on saving lives instead of violating Constitutional rights? Even if banning guns was the best way to save lives, why would we do it in violation of the Constitution instead of just changing the Constitution like the Founding Fathers intended? I mean, it's got provisions for rewriting the damn thing right there inside it.

>If I place a gun in the hand of a functioning gun

So, Reddit?

I look forward to new legislation banning both cars and humans.

>insect

At this point I honestly think a large part of it is just an artificial point that lends itself well to emotional appeals.

Because it's an easier agenda to push
It can be easier to restrict a method than a cause, even if that restriction is worse. Retards feels safer, and no really heavy lifting needs to be done

>people would still kill each other with knives and baseball bats
Y'know, there's a reason the homicide rate in the US is five digits and the homicide rate in the UK, Japan, France, South Africa, or Australia are 2-3 digits. It's much, much harder to kill someone with a knife.

And the Constitution really only ever defended the formation of militias. It wasn't until the 70s that the NRA started claiming a particular comma splice in certain unofficial copies of the Constitution was significant.

Oh gawd, the driver was a gun. I've doomed my own post.

Go on. Are the dicks attached to other men who also have dicks in their respective mouths and asses? What does this structure look like?

Nope. The Constitution says specifically that because Militias are necessary, the people must be armed.

I'm sorry, but your rhetoric is tired and we've already blown you the fuck out a thousand times today. You will never take our guns and you will never make even the most minor dent in our Constitution. Just stop now.

>Constitution really only ever defended the formation of militias.

You lie because you are scared.

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
>Andrew "Howlin' Mad" Jackson.

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence.”
>George Washington

“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”
>Alexander Hamilton.

“Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people of other countries, whose leaders are afraid to trust them with arms.”
James Madison.

“A free people ought to be armed.”
George Washington.

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
Thomas Jefferson.

>US violent crime literally drops like a stone after the 80s
>Assault Weapon Ban expires
>US violent crime continues dropping like a stone
>UK literally overrun with rape gangs and Pakistanis who cut peoples' heads off in the street
>80% of the US has shall-issue concealed carry permits
>US violent crime continues dropping like a stone
>France and Norway officially have more mass shootings than USA as of 2016

Eurocucks are so pathetic. Just admit that you aren't citizens of your countries--you're serfs. The government owns you and you will NEVER be free. Keep importing in all those Somalians though, take it from us, they're GREAT neighbors.

>wearing an advertisement on your chest

You are literally the worst kind of person.

They have less violence because they don't want to kill each other as much, not because they don't have guns to kill people with. Violent crime in the UK and Australia increased after firearms we banned. Japan has always had very low murder rates.

Also,
>the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed
Seems pretty clear to me. At the very least, it's enough that if we wanted to ban guns, it should be changed to "the right to a state-regulated militia shall not be infringed."

>mfw you're following in the footsteps of Thomas Paine
>mfw you left your homeland in 2011 and came to the new world alone
>mfw you have an accent in a new land
>mfw you get all the pussy
>mfw liberals assume I have beliefs in line with theirs
>mfw when I tell them I love guns, gasoline, trucks and tramp-stamps, BBQ and booze.

Japan is mono-culture, that more than anything keeps things pretty chill. And a submissive culture after having bombs dropped on them, fucks with the headspace. Like Germany after the war.

What is your source for those facts? Not a single one of them is true.

Those really don't prove the point you think they prove. Does the meaning waver even slightly if they're talking about militias?

The fuck do you think a militia is, user?

>US is five digits and the homicide rate in the UK, Japan, France, South Africa, or Australia are 2-3 digits
You realize that the US has several times the population of all of those countries combined, right?

>Those really don't prove the point you think they prove. Does the meaning waver even slightly if they're talking about militias?

You can argue semantics all day, but taken their whole body of work about arms and free peoples there is not a scrap of ambiguity in it. What they have wrote, what they have said, what they penned to the bill of rights, what they did at the time, what people had, what they expressed wanting, how they acted.

More importantly what they did -NOT- do, what they did -NOT- say, how they did -NOT- act. You are no better than Screamin' Mad Sarah Palin insisting on muddying the waters with 'Teach the Controversy' when there is none, but you have poisoned the well.

>pic related, wifeys truckgun

>Not a single one of them is true.
Do you have a source for that?

Quick user, to the Milita hall! Where we store our rifles, ammunation in a central place easily taken and captured. Preventing us entirely from doing what the liberals said we would be able to do if we formed the militia!

Per capita user, it is what all statstics are typically measured in. Means per 1000 head of population. If you suspect a stat might be wrong chances are it is raw data without mitigation of total population.

>Pic related, what Europeans use in a home invasion. Class IV weapon.

Crime in the US peaked in the early nighties. Here disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
That said this site does show a 36% drop in total crime from 1991 to 2014, and a 38% drop in violent crime from 1992(peak of violent crime) to 2014. The drop is even more noticeable if you take population growth into account, but fuck that math I don't even like finding percentages.

>5 figure crime rate
>Per 1000 population
So every single person in the US is tried for 10-99 crimes each year?

The Texas courts were really inundated this year when they decided to restart enforcing that one law where you can't have wire cutters in your back pocket. I got like fifty accounts on that alone.

>If you suspect a stat might be wrong chances are it is raw data without mitigation of total population.

As you can see, I said if you suspect it might be high or wrong it might be done without mitigation of total population. Please read the whole post before commenting user. You will save yourself a lot of anger, humiliation and time.

You fuckwit.

42% =/= 100%

>Militias
You know militias are just citizens with guns, right?

I wonder about those per capita statistics.

If you have a group of 1000 and 1 shoots as many as they can before being taken down then compare it to a group of 1,000,000 who have dozens of psychos but didn't kill as many people proportionally then you just look at the stats and say "well, as you can see, the smaller group has a MUCH higher death ratio to mass shootings"

Seems kind of odd when 1 act can make a bigger splash on a statistics board.

>Does the meaning waver even slightly if they're talking about militias?
They're talking about individuals, and individuals who form militias that aren't state regulated. You would know this if you had actually read the Federalist Papers in context, and not just a couple of asshats with an agenda to push. For someone so quick to cry about citations, you seem pretty willing to talk out of your ass.

>Two mass shootings have been prevented by a man with a Conceale Carry Permit but this will never make national news. One in Chicago, forget where the other is.

The fact is, if one happens in a small pond with less people you are more likely to be included than in a big pond with huge numbers. The US, land wise, is the majority of Europe. But it has no barrier of language, border or culture with other nations in that area so when something does happen like Florida it feels a lot closer. Despite the fact that a man in Italy, France, Germany is closer to genocide in Bosnia or war in Ukraine than I am from leaving my own State.

It is an appeal to emotion that tricks the mind in to thinking it is a lot closer than it really is.

Grasping at straws there buddy.

Is pornographic music videos and violent TV shows on FOX the source of America's willingness to kill?

>Y'know, there's a reason the homicide rate in the US
That's because they're retards. No, really, violent crime has been linked to being a bit soft in the brain. See how their crime statistics drop down 20 years after each state bans leaded gasoline.

Did I say something you disagree with?

I'm not trying to argue your guns away, friend.

>>Imagine a contemporary setting where every man has a gun
So... Switzerland.

Well apparently if you can kill people just as easily with a knife or a hammer as a gun, then you obviously don't need the gun since you've got all these fucking knives and hammers lying around to protect yourself with!

Aren't majority of popular settings already like that? I mean it's pretty rare to see any sort of weapon bans in popular settings and if they appear it's guaranteed to be dystopia.

>imagine a lightehearted setting where every little boy and girl has magic
>imagine that this magic vanishes along with innocence
>imagine as the setting suddenly becomes very dark as inevitably growing old means you inevitably lose your magic
>imagine children are brainwashed and enrolled into human weapon programs to protect nation states from other nation states magical girls.
>imagine magical girls are raped to forcibly remove their spells
>imagine when you grow too old or become disillusioned and lose your spells, you become useless except for breeding more magical boys and girls.
>imagine when it gets light hearted again when a jaded 31 year old female soldier who lost her magical powers decades ago suddenly starts getting her powers back for no reason she can decipher and she goes on a magical adventure with her familiar and a bunch of 12 year olds to save the world

It's not called the Bill of Needs, m8.

>You will never make even the most minor dent in our Constitution. Just stop now.

This mentality makes me want to pitch in with the anti-gun crowd more than any actual moral or political belief stance does. The fact idiot Americans can act like their constitution is some inviolable law of physics and how the Founding Fathers had the right idea while completely ignoring the fact that, YES, IT IS A CONSTITUTION. It was ALWAYS INTENDED TO BE CHANGED.

Like, how do you even square away that contradiction between "these guys are infallible so this doesn't need changed" and "these guys literally designed the thing to be changed on the assumption it would be necessary"?

On top of that, yeah, there's all the arguments above about the actual intent of that part of it, etc and the fact that they wrote this shit when even killing one guy fifteen feet away with a gun was a moderate challenge due to the technology of the era.

You really think a bunch of inventors, philosophers and explorers would want 9/10ths of a nation armed with extremely portable, accurate death-spitters you can even legally keep hidden?

Your culture is so fascinating and so terrifying all at once, Americanons.

There are over 100 million gun owners in the united states.

There are 30 000 deaths per year from firearms

20 000 are suicides, 10 000 are homicides.

Assuming each homicide is committed by a law abiding gun owner (which is laughable), this equates to less than 1% of all legal gun owners committing crimes.

Why should we trust 99% of american gun owners? Because they've proven themselves, you gigantic nancy.

>Why should we trust 99% of american gun owners?
Dude. Guy. Where was that brought up in ?

>You really think a bunch of inventors, philosophers and explorers would want 9/10ths of a nation armed with extremely portable, accurate death-spitters you can even legally keep hidden?

There's your answer, right there.

Also, that faggot doesn't know of the puckle gun, or the Girandoni rifle. Back when the founders made the Constitution, there was a SHITLOAD of neat guns that could kill well past 20-30 feet, and with surprising accuracy, and they were well aware that technology would continue to evolve.

Hey, as I said, I don't really have much of an active political stance on it. It's just fucking crazy to me as someone who's grown up their whole life in Scotland and never had to even THINK about the possibility of being shot. Dunblane happened when I was a toddler and since then the concept of a mass shooting happening here is kind of hard to fathom. Iunno man, it's just cultural weirdness and comfort/habit that make America seem so bizarre to us I'd imagine.

I mean sure, there's always gonna be guns anywhere, but I do think people greatly overrate the "all guns will be in the hands of criminals then!" argument. It's true, but a LOT of those are going to be organised crime due to logistics and the risks involved of bringing weapons in - and organised crime, for better or worse, is well.... organised. It's a business for them as much as a lifestyle. Unprovoked violence against the general public doesn't fit into that whole 'profit and status' mindset that crime rings, mobs etc have.

>literally advocating for guns out of the hands of civilians that overwhelmingly use them for lawful purposes
>and keeping them in the hands of criminals because "can't make money off organized crime if mobsters kill people"

You can stay in bongland. And I thought Americlaps had terrible education.

He didn't say either of those things,

The closest he got was saying that the pro-gun side's obsession with the inviolability of the constitution (or at least that portion of it) is so annoying that it makes him consider the anti-gun side on principle, because whatever else they may believe they aren't harping on and on that the constitution that was specifically designed to be a living document can't be changed

>puckle gun
>Girandoni rifle
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalthoff_repeater

...I don't want to imagine this...

This isn't true.

>You can stay in bongland. And I thought Americlaps had terrible education.

As a burger, I sadly agree with this. Schools teach math and history, but there is no course for common sense

...

Let me just throw this in: In Germany it's hard to obtain guns and it has always been. So I was never scared of being shot at all, guns were never a problem in my country.

In the USA many people have guns and you are unsafe if you don't have one, because every small-time criminal has one for sure.

I'd rather stay here. America overdid the whole guns thing and now it is out of control.

>This is what Europeans actually believe.
Americans aren't running around murdering each other in high-noon shootouts, kraut.

America's insanely high gun death rate is solely the responsibility of one race and socioeconomic makeup. There are three or four US cities which make up the entirety of our gun death statistics.

>What makes gun violence worse than knife violence?

Even when unarmed, it's a million times easier to defend yourself against a knife than a gun.

If someone came at me with a knife, I could feed it to them.

If that same person had a gun... very different outcome.

Sorry, Mohammed, I prefer things our way.

And it's mostly gang bangers killing each other, which is hardly a tragedy.

>This is what Europeans actually believe.

Considering how often you hear about needing a gun for self protection, a lot of americans obviously believe it too.

Imagine my fantasy setting where i have her

>America's insanely high gun death rate is solely the responsibility of one race and socioeconomic makeup. There are three or four US cities which make up the entirety of our gun death statistics.

None of that is true, you're a racist idiot.

Black people are twice as likely to get shot as white people. But there are four times as many white people in the US as black people. So, white people get shot (by white people, in New Mexico,) twice as much as black people get shot.

Although you're correct that "Americans aren't running around murdering each other in high-noon shootouts." The rate's still fairly low; I live on the south side of Chicago and I've never seen a shooting. It's only high compared to places with sane gun laws, like Australia.

I wonder, what if there were a way to modify the Constitution? That would be interesting. Maybe we could call them amendments.

Wasn't always hard. But some guy with a funny mustache decided to disarm Germans be a use he only had about 10% of the people on his side. Once he had the guns and the 90% didn't, they became a lot easier to convince.

>amending the bill of rights

You're doing it wrong, commie.

Any way you spin it, the reality is that blacks are 13% of the population, the men 7%, and they perpetrate roughly 50% of all murders.

Black people don't want whitey holding them down by allowing their numbers to matter in the tally of victims so they compensate for smaller numbers by shooting one another.

The chances of me actually ever needing a gun for self defense, not even considering the chances of me taking up arms against my gov't/an invading army, are laughably small.
I also don't hunt or intend to.
I definitely don't need guns in any way shape or form, but I want them because they are fun. Many more people die from privately owned swimming pools than from firearms each year, ban those before guns if lives are important. If criminal intent is important, removing guns merely treats the symptom.
Since I'm a law abiding citizen like 99.9% of gun owners there is no reason I, or any other law abiding citizen shouldn't be able to own a firearm.

> black men perpetrate roughly 50% of all murders.

That's because they're rebelling against slavery!!

complicated.

cracked.com/article_24104_7-places-earth-that-are-way-different-than-you-imagine.html

You might want to read that first part there. "Sane gun laws" have nothing to do with anything when the population is insane.